Allowed

Kapil and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2023CRLA/9974/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal challenged the rejection of bail in a SC/ST case. The High Court found the lower court failed to consider the appellant's side and ignored fundamental rights regarding overcrowding. The ban on bail was set aside, and the appellants were enlarged on bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellants released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, subject to conditions regarding tampering with evidence, pressuring witnesses, and attendance at trial.

Kapil and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9974 of 2022

¶3

Appellant :- Kapil And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Krishna Dutt Awasthi,Om Prakash Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

As per ofÏce report dated 24.3.2023, notice on opposite party no.2 has been served, but no one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose this appeal.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellants; learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellants to set aside the impugned order dated 2.12.2022, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Auraiya has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 365 of 2022, under Sections 323,504,506 IPC and Section 3(1) (Da,3(1) (Dha) SC/ST Act, Police Station Dibiyapur, District Auraiya.

¶8

There is allegation against the appellants regarding commission of offence of beating and threatening of persons belonging to schedule caste.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that it is case of no injury nor any caste related words used . The appellants have been falsely implicated in this case. They have no criminal history to their credit and are languishing in jail since 2.12.2022. In case, the appellants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the allegations involved are very

¶11

serious in nature. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the court below has not properly considered the case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 2.12.2022 is, hereby, set aside.

¶13

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let appellants, Kapil and Sudhanshu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶15

(i) The appellants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

(ii) The appellants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶17

(iii) The appellants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i)

¶18

opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

¶19

(iv) The appellants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶20

(v) The appellants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶21

(vi) The appellants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed in accordance with law.

¶23

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶24

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶25

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶26

Order Date :- 26.4.2023 Atul kr. sri.

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kapil and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Rahman Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jalees Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishan Kumar Bhardwaj Vs State of U.P.

Manish Paliwal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chhote @ Gulfam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandra Bhushan Rajbhar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another